[Blog] Trump's Plan for Palestine: Ignoring Al-Aqsa is to Repeat the Mistake of 1947

Seventy-eight years after the controversial establishment of Israel, Trump's 21-point plan reaffirms the marginalization of Palestinians, undermining any prospect for lasting peace and a sovereign state.

Seventy-eight years after the disputed creation of the State of Israel at the expense of the Palestinians, the United States, subservient to Israel, proposes a 21-point peace plan. 1947 - 2025: two imposed plans, one common loser: the Palestinians.

The partition plan for Palestine adopted by the UN in 1947 and the 21-point peace plan presented by Donald Trump in 2025 reveal a consistent truth: Palestinians remain largely absent from decisions that directly affect their future.

Presented as a solution after the Gaza war, the 21-point plan revolves around three promises: Israel's security, the deradicalization of Gaza, and a “path towards a Palestinian state.”

Made public on September 29, 2025, the Trump Plan is already viewed as externally imposed: more favorable to Israel and regional partners than to the Palestinians themselves. Israel finds its key priorities addressed: the release of hostages, dismantling Hamas, and international control of Gaza. The Palestinians, on the other hand, face a fait accompli.

Neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority were involved in drafting the plan. The imposed conditions (disarmament, technocratic transitional administration, international supervision) leave them with no room for maneuver. As for the prospect of a Palestinian state, it is relegated to an indefinite future, conditioned without a timeline or firm guarantees.

What can be said about the ninth point of the Trump Plan – Gaza will be administered by a transitional government composed of Palestinian technocrats for daily management, under the supervision of a new international body established by the United States with Arab and European partners – except that it amounts to a form of guardianship over Gaza, if not a proxy occupation.

Advantages for Israel

As in 1947, the imbalance is striking. Israel immediately gains concrete benefits. The Palestinians are left with a distant, hypothetical horizon, conditioned by external choices. In both cases, the non-consultation of Palestinians undermines the plan from its inception.

In 1947, the Palestinian rejection paved the way for war and lasting division. In 2025, it is highly likely that the lack of Palestinian endorsement will transform the Trump Plan into a political tool for Israel and Washington, but not a solution for peace.

History seems to be repeating itself: two externally imposed plans, two pivotal moments, but one same observation: Palestinians appear more as subjects of decisions than as actors of their own fate. And as long as this absence of voice persists, peace will likely remain a deferred horizon.

As long as the question of Al-Aqsa is not addressed, no agreement can be accepted by either the Palestinians or the Muslim world. Ignoring Al-Aqsa is to repeat the mistakes of 1947 and 2025: believing that one can resolve a territorial conflict without considering its spiritual and identity dimensions. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is the emotional and religious heart of the conflict. If it is not protected and recognized with a respected status, any peace plan, whether it be from 1947, Oslo, or the Trump Plan 2025, will remain incomplete and doomed to failure.

Clearly, the Trump Plan resolves nothing without Palestinian consultation. Palestinians are once again absent from a crucial decision, just as they were in 1947. This lack of consultation is not a mere procedural detail: it is the very root of the failure of any attempt at a lasting resolution. And just like in 1947, history shows that any imposed solution creates more conflict than it brings peace.

In conclusion, the Trump Plan, rooted in a logic of realpolitik, suffers not only from practical unrealism with the disappearance of Hamas and foreign administration of Gaza, but also from a lack of guarantees for the Palestinian cause – statehood and sovereignty.

By Alain Laridon, former deputy and ambassador